SINHA GOVINDJI Vs. DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF IMPORTS AND EXPORTS
LAWS(SC)-1961-3-65
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Decided on March 23,1961

SINHA GOVINDJI Appellant
VERSUS
DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF IMPORTS AND EXPORTS Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) These are two writ petitions in respect of two orders 'dated August 3, 1960, by which the Joint Chief Controller of Imports, Madras, cancelled two import licences, Nos. A 863296 and 836640 dated January 18, 1960, and February 2, 1960, respectively, granted in favour of the petitioner, Messrs. Sinha Govindji of Bangalore Road, bellary, for the purpose of importing cellulose nitrate sheets of the value of Rs. 75,000 each for two licensing periods, April/september, 1959, and October/ march, 1960. The complaint of the petitioner firm is that respondents 1 and 2 have cancelled the licences in circumstances which amounted to a denial of its right to be given a reasonable opportunity of being heard, as provided by cl. 10 of the Imports (Control) order, 1955, before the impugned orders were passed and thus arbitrarily and without authority of law deprived the petitioner of its fundamental right to carry on its business under Art. 19 of the constitution.
(2.) The point for decision is a short one and we need only state such facts as bear upon that point. The petitioner's case is that the proprietor of the firm is a citizen of India carrying on a business of the manufacture of celluloid and plastic bangles, etc. , at Bellary in the Mysore State. The petitioner was granted the two licences referred to above and thereafter entered into firm commitments for the import of cellulose sheets to the value of Rs. 99,000. On March 4, 1960, the petitioner was surprised to receive two letters from the Assistant Controller of Imports, Madras, calling upon the petitioner to let him know the extent to which the licenses had been utilised and asking the petitioner not to enter into fresh commitments against the said licenses without specific and prior approval of the Controllers' office. This led to some correspondence between the petitioner and the Control authorities, details whereof are not necessary for our purpose. On May 27, 1960, the petitioner received two notices, only one of which we need set out in full. It stated: "It is hereby notified that in exercise of the powers conferred by cl. 9 of the Imports (Control) order, 1955, the Government of India, in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry propose to cancel licence No. A 836640/60/au/m dated the Second february, 1960, valued at Rs. 75,000 (Rupees seventy five thousand only) for import of Cellulose nitrate Sheets from the Soft Currency area except south Africa, granted by the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Madras to Messrs. Sinha govindji, No. 18, Bangalore Road, Bellary-2, unless sufficient cause against this is furnished to the Joint chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Madras, within ten days of the date of issue of this notice, by the said Messrs. Sinha Govindji, No. 18, bangalore Road, Bellary-2 or any Bank, or any other party who may be interested in it. In view of what is stated above, Messrs. Sinha govindji, Bellary or any Bank, or any other party who may be interested in the said licence no. 836640/60/au/m dated Second February, 1960, are hereby directed not to enter into any commitments against the said license and return it immediately to the Joint Chief Controller of Imports and Exports, Madras. (Sd. ) J. K. Sarkar, deputy Chief Controller of imports and Exports. "
(3.) The notices, be it noted, did not state on what grounds -falling within cl. 9 of the Imports (Control) Order, 1955, it was proposed to cancel the licences of the petitioner. Clause 9 of the Control Order states four grounds for cancellation of a licence, and we may read the clause here omitting those grounds which are not relevant for our case: "9.Cancellation of Licences: The Central government or any other officer authorised in this behalf may cancel any licence granted under this Order or otherwise render it ineffective: (a) if the licence has been granted through in advertise or mistake or has been obtained by fraud or misrepresentation; (b). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; (c). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ; (d). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ". By a letter dated May 30, 1960, the petitioner referred to the earlier correspondence on the subject and said inter alia: "Now clause (9) of the Import Control Order, 1955, under which action is proposed to be taken envisages the cancellation of a licence on various grounds. Your notice does not disclose on which of these grounds the proposed action is sought to be taken. Without knowing on what ground the proposed cancellation is to be effected it is impossible for me to show cause against it. I may, however, state that I have not done anything justifying the cancellation of the licence under the said Rule and that as far as I can see, there is no ground whatsoever for such cancellation. ";


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.